From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23312 invoked by alias); 17 Apr 2008 14:53:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 23299 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Apr 2008 14:53:43 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 14:53:25 +0000 Received: (qmail 11333 invoked from network); 17 Apr 2008 14:53:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO wind.local) (vladimir@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 17 Apr 2008 14:53:23 -0000 From: Vladimir Prus To: Nick Roberts Subject: Re: [RFA/RFC] Report the original location specification for a breakpoint. Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:28:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 0.20070907.709405) Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <200804151434.57665.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <200804171359.09556.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <18439.9128.907701.745181@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> In-Reply-To: <18439.9128.907701.745181@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200804171853.19525.vladimir@codesourcery.com> Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-04/txt/msg00334.txt.bz2 On Thursday 17 April 2008 14:17:12 Nick Roberts wrote: > > > Isn't this going to affect more than MI? I thought the text from > > > ui_out_field_string was displayed for console too, just without the > > > label. > > > > I don't this so, but I'll check. We can always make this field output > > just for MI. > > It's used by "info breakpoints". What's "it" above? Anyway, it appears that the field indeed gets output in CLI mode, so I'll adjust my patch not to do that. > > > > This definitely needs documentation to go in. I can't say this > > > enough. Undocumented fields in the MI output might as well not exist. > > There are already many other fields that aren't documented, e.g., > pending, what, cond, ignore etc. In fact the MI output of -break-insert > is very variable. Are you volunteering to document that? - Volodya